UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2008 > May > May 27

Re: MoD File Release

From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 20:33:20 +0100
Archived: Tue, 27 May 2008 09:19:00 -0400
Subject: Re: MoD File Release

>From: Stanton T Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 14:39:50 -0300
>Subject: Re: MoD File Release

>>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 16:03:27 +0100
>>Subject: Re: MoD File Release


>The 1997 release of 160 pages of NSA UFO documents was very
>enlightening. One could read 1 or 2 sentences per page. Wite-out
>was used on the rest. The standard USAF (false)statement about
>UFOs has for decades indicated that, aside from the National
>Archives they were not aware of any other government agency
>holding UFO documents! We know the FBI, CIA, and NSA and DIA etc
>were. They lied. I wonder if the MOD has stated flatly that no
>other agency is holding UFO materials??

They effectively have, but in the inverse sense - they say that
the only department directly concerned with UFOs is Sec(AS) (now

The problem with interpreting redactions in documents which
mention UFOs as evidence of some kind of concealment of
information which would reveal positive knowledge of ET
visitation is that the content of the redactions is unknown. For
instance, it could relate to sabotage of hostile satellites
under the cover of 'created' UFO activity. This technically is
UFO related, but there is good reason for not revealing it.
Until those redactions are ultimately disclosed (probably not in
our lifetimes), one can only speculate what might be behind

>Let us also note that the Condign author claimed falsely that
>his report was only the 2nd English Language large study of
>UFOs, besides the Condon Report. He was ignorant. Blue Book
>Special Report 14 Had 240 charts tables, graphs, maps. The
>Congressional Symposium of July 29, 1968, has testimony from 12
>Scientists.. all in English. He was woefully unin formed about
>the subject of plasmas and UFOs. Certainly here is one case
>where absence of evidence in UK MOD UFO files cannot be taken as
>evidence for overall absence. Are the intelligence agency UFO
>files covered by FOIA in the UK?

MI5, MI6, and GCHQ are exempt from FoIA at least for the time
being. However, for reasons given in previous posts, I am
convinced that any interest these have or had in UFOs was, a)
transient and b) related to their specifically defined areas of
responsibility. Their function would primarily be as channels
supplying information to any interested parties in the MoD.



Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com